Posted on 10/11/2002 7:53:12 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
I have just checked to find out what documents were filed in the US Supreme Court by Doug Forrester. The lamestream media has blown it, big time. So has the Court's Press Office. Forrester has NOT filed anything new in the Supreme Court this week. On the other hand, the case is still live.
Last week, Forrester filed TWO documents with the US SC. One was the Request for Emergency Relief (which was denied not by Justice Souter alone, but by the whole Court). The other, however, was a Petition for Writ of Certiorari, which is the standard request for the Court to take a case in due course.
Somewhere between Justice Souter's office and the Clerk's Office they LOST TRACK of the Petition for Cert. The Press Office released the FALSE information that only the Request for Emergency Relief had been filed. A lawyer for the National Republican Senatorial Court had to trot over to the Court and point out that there were TWO documents filed, not just one.
Late yesterday, the Court "FOUND" the Petition for Cert, which has NOT been acted upon. The Clerk docketed that paper. The press noticed the docketing, and assumed that Forrester had filed a new case. This was a false conclusion, based on the Court's Press Office getting things wrong at the beginning.
Bottom line: the status of this case in the Supreme Court is exactly what I surmised. The case is dead for emergency relief, but it is very much alive for decision in due course (meaning about eight months from now).
The US SC does not have a set deadline to decide whether to take any case. They certainly will not decide whether to take this one until they see the election results in New Jersey. If Forrester wins, I think it highly likely that four Justices will vote to take the case (that's all it takes), and that will be done. The case will be briefed, argued, and decided.
If Lautenberg wins, the Court will have painted itself into a corner. If they rule for Forrester, what is the remedy? Does the US SC dare issue an Order throwing out a Member of the Senate? To avoid embarrassing themselves, the Court would be unlikely to take the case in that situation.
What I have just said here is the plain unvarnished truth. Anything you read to the contrary in the lamestream media is hogwash. Trust me, I know these things.
Interesting SNAFU by the clerk. Unfortunately, I think that your Catch 22 scenario may play the Court's hand. They can't toss a duly elected Senator, especially if it means control. Lautenberg needs to win. The issue, however, would not necessary be moot in that the issue is surely to arise again (think Hawaii) and the Court may say "Okay, Rats, here's the Rule of Law, to be enforced strictly by the District Courts and if they are in your pocket the Court of Appeals and if it is the Ninth then us. All on shortened time." Maybe throw a little reference to Rule 11 of the FRCP in their as a reminder for the lawyers who consider filing in the future.
I can dream can't I? ;^)
Which means that Loserburg will be on the ballot, and if he wins he will maintain his seat in the Senate and election victory if the SCOTUS rules that it was too late to put him on the ballot. Unless somehow the SCOTUS can invalidate his election and have him removed from office. Which I do not think they can do. And if they did, then McGreevy would just appoint his replacement.
Which is probably going to happen anyway. I doubt Loserburg will stay in the Senate very long.
But, I hope that you are wrong and that the USSC will hear the case if Lautenberg wins as well. My reasoning: The Dems argued to the NJSC that throwing out the 51-day rule "wouldn't harm" the GOP.
If Lautenberg wins, then the argument that the ballot change "wouldn't harm" the GOP would be obviously false since they admitted they would lose with the Torch.
But I still have faith in NJ-ites to vote out the SLEAZY Lautenberg-Toricelly-McGreedy machine. Just Do It.
Each House of Congress judges its own members' qualifications. The Court has no power to remove a Senator from office, and there is, practically speaking, no way that the Senate will expel Lautenberg on this basis, even if the Court rules that NJ election laws were violated.
IF Forrester loses, and IF the SCOTUS takes the case and rules in Forrester's favor, SO WHAT?
The votes can't be taken back, and NJ will have elected an officially certifiable cheat. Lousenberg won't be removed, and the 'Craps will have gotten away with it.
The 'Craps have already gotten away with it.
Then Te court could step in, after it was decided that way, and rule against SCONJ. ending all argument, but without taking part in the Political Shenanigans.
It is clearly too late to change the ballots again. If we were concerned about overseas and military absentee ballots a week and a half ago, we're guilty of outrageous hypocrisy if we demand that the SCOTUS turn around and invalidate the Lautenberg ballots even today, never mind next week. Lautenberg's on the ballot, and on the ballot he'll stay. It's too late for any other course of action. Forrester needs to beat him.
Isn't that the essence of the action?
Yeah, but it's about precedent. And in future decisions precedent is the bed rock of interpretation.
I hope the USSC takes this case seriously as an afront to the constitutionally mandated separation of powers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.